Question

The following excerpt is from the racial profiling data collection resource center In 2006, the New York City Police Department stopped a half-million pedestrians for suspected criminal involvement. Raw89 percent of the stops involved nonwhites. Do these statistics point to a racial bias in police officers' decisions to stop particular pedestrians? o they indicate that officers are particularly intrusive when stopping nonwhites?

Write a report that answers the questions posed using the fact thst 44% of New York City residents were classified as white in 2006. In your report, cite some shortcomings in using the proportion of white residents in the city to formulate likelihoods.

Answer 1

answer:

• We will expect that the a large portion of a million people on foot the police halted for suspected criminal contribution is a genuine agent of New York City occupants.
• Given that 44% of New York City occupants were white inhabitants, 56% is non-whites. Thus, we ought to expect that level of non-white people on foot the police ceased for suspected criminal association is 56%. Be that as it may, the genuine figure is 89%. In this way, what we test is: what is the probability, i.e., likelihood of 89% of every an example of a large portion of a million from a populace with 56%.
• For comfort of introduction and comprehension, let p and pcap speak to the populace and test extent. At that point, the likelihood dissemination of pcap can be approximated by N(0, 1), as delineated underneath::
• these is express the

[(pcap - p)/C{p(1 - p)/n}] ~ N(0, 1),

(where n = 500000)

We need P(pcap ≥ 0.89),
P[Z ≥ (0.89 – 0.56)/{0.56(0.44)/5.105}],
p(z (0.33)(0.2464/5.105)

p(z(0.33)0.2196

= P(Z ≥ 470)

= 0.

• Along these lines, there is no possibility that the example rate could be this high. This thus infers there is solid proof to propose of racial predisposition in cop's choice to stop a specific person on foot.